Intel Launches 10th Gen 14nm Notebook CPU Family

[mr moose]

Here's some helpful information to help understand what each statement actually means and what it doesn't mean:

 

Intel release more 14nm CPU's means that basically Intel can't mass produce on 10nm right now.   It does not mean they are in trouble or never will.

 

Intel release a 15W Mobile component means they have produced a CPU that according the TDP spec needs 15watts of heat dissipated from it to maintain Tjc. It does not mean they are lying. 

 

Intel release a 6 core part means Intel has worked out how to make 6 cores work using their current architecture, it does not mean they are being lazy or sandbagging.

 

 

 

 

[realpetertdm]

Jesus fucking christ Intel, just get on with 10nm PLEASE. Everyone else is moving to 7nm, fucking hell

[Fnige]

3 hours ago, realpetertdm said:

Jesus fucking christ Intel, just get on with 10nm PLEASE. Everyone else is moving to 7nm, fucking hell

They’ll catch up alright Loads rifle with threatening intents

[Unixsystem]

On 8/21/2019 at 4:50 PM, Arika S said:

Something I think most people on this forum don't understand is that the large majority don't give a shit about the node size of the cpu in their laptop, hell they don't likely care about the CPU anyway. 

 

So for people to say "Intel is in trouble" is funny as hell because it shows that you don't understand the market. 

This is an enthusiast forum, we tend to talk a lot more about the underlying tech. But I think it's pretty self evident that performance gains on 14nm have become largely non-existant. While right now AMD doesn't seem to be pushing too hard into mobile, it's only a matter of time. If Intel doesn't have a functional 10nm/7nm out when that happens, then they won't be able to compete in terms of raw performance. 

 

Sure, the general public may not know what a node is, but if the AMD box says 8 core and the Intel box says 4 core, and at the same/better clocks for a given price bracket, that will start to shift the market. Anyone who says "Intel is in trouble" is probably referring more to the long term than "Intel will be bankrupt within a year". And even then, the trouble is more likely a loss/balancing out of market share, not that they are going to get completely stamped out. 

[Unixsystem]

On 8/21/2019 at 8:49 AM, TVwazhere said:

*whispers* long live Skylake

Broadwell sends its regards. 

[The King of the Undead]

6 minutes ago, Waffles13 said:

Broadwell sends its regards. 

sandy lake sends it's as well.

[mr moose]

10 hours ago, Waffles13 said:

This is an enthusiast forum, we tend to talk a lot more about the underlying tech.

But we are not the large majority that Arika was referring to. 

[TechyBen]

11 hours ago, Waffles13 said:

This is an enthusiast forum, we tend to talk a lot more about the underlying tech. But I think it's pretty self evident that performance gains on 14nm have become largely non-existant. While right now AMD doesn't seem to be pushing too hard into mobile, it's only a matter of time. If Intel doesn't have a functional 10nm/7nm out when that happens, then they won't be able to compete in terms of raw performance. 

 

Sure, the general public may not know what a node is, but if the AMD box says 8 core and the Intel box says 4 core, and at the same/better clocks for a given price bracket, that will start to shift the market. Anyone who says "Intel is in trouble" is probably referring more to the long term than "Intel will be bankrupt within a year". And even then, the trouble is more likely a loss/balancing out of market share, not that they are going to get completely stamped out. 

Yep. All these saying "your all overreacting" forget, AMD were king at one point for performance... then lost. Intel could go the same way. AMD never went bankrupt, they never swapped places (from underdog to market leader), we don't expect Intel to stop being the market owner, or become dead... they just may lose their lead in the race for a while, or longer.

[LAwLz]

On 8/22/2019 at 9:40 AM, realpetertdm said:

Jesus fucking christ Intel, just get on with 10nm PLEASE. Everyone else is moving to 7nm, fucking hell

It's worth noting that Intel's 10nm is similar to everyone else's 7nm. So things aren't as bad as they might seem at first.

 

I am pretty excited for this launch.

6 cores 12 threads at 15w TDP.

802.11ax integrated

LPDDR4x support (even for the Skylake derived SKUs)

Higher turbo clocks

The bottom SKUs now mostly get 4 cores rather than 2 cores.

Same hardware mitigation for several Spectre/Meltdown security issues as Ice Lake.

[Loote]

Zen 2 mobile when? I think current AMD's mobile offerings are somewhat problematic, looking for a device for my mom, sister, brother, myself etc. most would still do best with a blue CPU, however, 7nm should make significant difference(though I wonder what will they do about IO die in low power CPUs), and if AMD is a better choice in 60% of options instead of 10, staying competitive in another 30, this might make a huge impact.Iirc there's the same money if not more in laptops etc. compared to desktops, there are more laptop users than there are desktop users and(my assumption) some of them will exchange the whole device when the battery is dead. Also, so many laptops have dual core processors which means huge room for improvement compared to i5-2500 that is good enough for normal usage.

 

So... I don't like the amount of models Intel has at all, I'm for even marginal improvements those 14nm processors bring, but it'll be a mess to do research on which chip is the best to choose.

[porina]

5 minutes ago, Loote said:

Zen 2 mobile when?

Just guessing, but AMD going desktop first with Ryzen in general is probably related to their push into server, since they share closer similarities there. Mobile is going to be more APU focused and that's a distant 3rd priority it seems. Still, they seem to be getting some design wins with Zen+ CPUs on budget gaming laptops so that's a start.

[TCG_Infiniti]

AMD: 7nm!!!!!

Intel: 14nm++++++++++!

[Nanners]

As the consumer there is no difference between 7nm 10nm or 14nm so I don't get why people keep bringing it up.

It's about the performance and price of the end product and not how it's made.

[mr moose]

5 hours ago, Nanners said:

As the consumer there is no difference between 7nm 10nm or 14nm so I don't get why people keep bringing it up.

It's about the performance and price of the end product and not how it's made.

 

Exactly,  Consumers don't care, in fact almost everyone in the industry doesn't care, logistics companies don't care what technology the engine is built from they just want to know the mileage and power.

 

As such Intel could shelve 10nm indefinitely and so long as they don't have any trouble with 7nm will still be ok. Maybe not swimming in cash but not in danger of bankruptcy either.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Unixsystem]

6 hours ago, Nanners said:

As the consumer there is no difference between 7nm 10nm or 14nm so I don't get why people keep bringing it up.

It's about the performance and price of the end product and not how it's made.

I'm sure any consumer that has bought a Ryzen 3000 CPU would disagree with that. There is no way that we would have 12/16 cores on mainstream desktop with reasonable temperatures and power draw without AMD moving to 7nm.

 

Intel did extremely well with their entire Core line, and especially with Skylake, to the degree that they have effectively been competetive/in the lead just by releasing the same architecture with what can barely even be considered marginal improvements. Don't get me wrong, I'm not taking anything away from Intel's achievements with Skylake and their fantastic 14nm, but it is years old at this point and AMD has clearly caught up and in some facets passed by what Intel can do on their current tech. 

 

Obviously we have very little to go off of on what Cannon/Ice/Tiger/Comet/whatever-Lake is practically capable of, but all signs pointed to them being major architectural changes that should have leapfroged anything on the market. Unfortunately, those arches were all designed with 10nm in mind and you can't just easily backport a fully rebuilt arch from a new node to an older one. As a result we are stuck with a great but aging Skylake based arch with more or less static IPC and core counts that are rapidly reaching and exceeding the power and thermal limitations of their platform. 

 

You are right in the sense that a new node by itself means effectively nothing on a consumer end. However, a new high quality node opens up tons of opportunities for either newer architectural changes not possible on larger nodes, or a drop in power draw that facilitates moar cores without sacrifices. Imagine if Intel had gotten original 10nm Cannonlake out in 2016, or even early 2017. Ryzen 1/2 already had an uphill battle against Skylake and its derivatives; if Intel had been able to strike back immediately with a brand new arch that had 10-15% IPC more than Skylake plus defaulted to 6 or 8 cores, the story of AMD for the last three years would be a very different one, and pretty much all of that can be laid at the feet of Intel 10nm being a real bear of a node to actually manufacture for. 

 

Tl;dr: the node doesn't matter, but the implications of the node absolutely do. 

[thorhammerz]

 

Quote

Tl;dr: the node doesn't matter, but the implications of the node absolutely do. 

Precisely why the end consumer gives 0 fucks about how many nanometres (inconsistent between semi-conductor fabs to begin with) the node their silicon is supposedly built with, so long as the price is right, the performance is suitable (whether it core count, IPC, frequency, or special support for whatever codec or ancillary feature is in vogue), and the OEMs have something to do PR/marketing with.

[Unixsystem]

3 hours ago, thorhammerz said:

 

Precisely why the end consumer gives 0 fucks about how many nanometres (inconsistent between semi-conductor fabs to begin with) the node their silicon is supposedly built with, so long as the price is right, the performance is suitable (whether it core count, IPC, frequency, or special support for whatever codec or ancillary feature is in vogue), and the OEMs have something to do PR/marketing with.

Again, the point isn't that Intel hasn't reached an arbitrary number for their current process. The point is that other companies have surpassed the capabilities of Intel's current process. Yes, Intel's current performance is still enough for the vast majority of customers. However, look at what happened with Ryzen.

 

Intel had complete dominance in the desktop space. Ryzen 1 came out, and while it was a no brainer for low/mid range systems (or workstations in certain workloads), Intel still had a healthy lead on their performance. Ryzen 2 didn't really change that, but now with Ryzen 3 there are very few good reasons to stick with Intel currently. A few limited use cases, sure, but AMD has a price advantage, a core count advantage, and an IPC advantage. For your average user Intel may be good enough, but an AMD system bought today is probably going to have more longevity or a lower price than an equivalent Intel system. 

 

Right now in mobile Intel is still largely uncontested, but AMD is starting to sneak up on them there too, and it's only a matter of time before we see mobile Zen 2/3 parts. If, at that point, Intel is still on a 14nm process, then they aren't realistically going to be able to compete head to head. Not specifically because "oh no muh 14nm", but because there is only so much they can do on an old node with limited density and limited opportunities for power savings. 

 

I'm not saying that Intel shouldn't release these new 14nm parts; they are a product company and they need to release new things whenever they can. I'm also not saying that Intel is doomed or this one 10nm slip up is going to cost them the company. But acting like "well performance is good enough so therefore Intel's obvious long term manufacturing troubles don't matter at all" is incredibly short sighted.

 

Now, maybe despite all the 10nm shenanigans they will get their own 7nm out on time and it'll wipe the floor with everything else and they'll be back in an undisputed lead. But at this point they have missed every deadline and performance target that they promised for 10nm, and while the two processes aren't inherently linked I don't personally see any reason to trust their claims about their new node when their previous one has been a pretty much unmitigated disaster. 

[Results45]

On 8/21/2019 at 6:52 AM, Princess Luna said:

 i5-1035G4

 

Why is it that in this time where we're seeing better and better competition between Team R, G, and B but am seeing more and more confusing product naming?

 

Fore example:

• GTX 1080/1080TI became GTX 16xx/16xxTI and RTX 2080TI SUPER
• Core i9 9900K now might be Core i9 10990KF G4
• RX 570 & Vega 56 is now RX 5700XT and Radeon Pro Vega II
• ARE THINGS LIKE Ryzen 9 7990XEKFSTI and Radeon Pro RTX Arcturus 6900.36XTZ RayMaster NEXT!!!??? 

 

Is it just me or are marketing teams having too much fun (or too incompetent to make it easy on consumers)?

[Maticks]

I am waiting for the 8cx to come out in a surface product. That will blow away anything Intel can say about power usage and performance.

Intel looks to be in real trouble here. AMD are doing well and Snapdragon is moving into the PC market.

Can Microsoft make it run x86 code without a major performance hit.

 

[Fnige]

On 8/25/2019 at 10:57 AM, Maticks said:

I am waiting for the 8cx to come out in a surface product. That will blow away anything Intel can say about power usage and performance.

Intel looks to be in real trouble here. AMD are doing well and Snapdragon is moving into the PC market.

Can Microsoft make it run x86 code without a major performance hit.

 

Samsung Galaxy Book S will also have it too, im looking forward to that

[Results45]

Guys, it worse than I could've ever imagined:

.

[mr moose]

4 hours ago, Results45 said:

Guys, it worse than I could've ever imagined:

.

WTF is it with all these you tuber's putting there hands over their face in that pose?   Surely I am not the only one who sees that as form of assumed self importance and being stuck up? 

[The King of the Undead]

On 8/26/2019 at 10:47 PM, Caroline said:

Wait til 14nm++++++++++++++++++++++ 11th gen comes out...

intel's logic is the more +s the better!

[corsairian]

On 8/21/2019 at 6:52 AM, Princess Luna said:

I was chatting to some friends earlier on the possibility I'd finally upgrade from my current i5 6200U laptop... I don't need a whole lot of horse power from my laptop only portability really so I never felt any need to upgrade so far but... I might take the finally release of 10nm to get something new.

 

Intel's claiming 18% IPC improvement from 14nm++ to 10nm, these processors should stack relatively well against the current pricey Whiskey Lake i7 8565U if so... It is all about pricing to make it attractive.

 

Looking at the alternatives the i5-1035G4 seems to be the far better alternative value wise, You get Iris Plus opposed to UHD and the i7's really only bring small frequency increments and 2mb more lvl3 Cache to the table... tough to justify.

 

I just hope that there will be well priced decent built laptops carrying these CPU.

Reading this made my head hurt. I now realize how bad Intel's naming schemes are. I5-1035G4 lol